Mad About Vlad For Hall Of Fame ... Plus: 'Roidz Boyz' Bonds & Clemens

^

Even with increasing reliance on advanced statistics and technology, Major League Baseball often lives in the past. And that's usually grand, as I'm a 50-something guy with fond memories of eons gone by. Indisputable evidence of the old-schoolness of the game: The Baseball Writers Association of America only accepts Hall of Fame ballots sent via U.S. mail. That's right: No email, no faxes. 

What? They couldn't work out a deal with the Pony Express? Carrier pigeons are on strike?

As a 30-year BBWAA member and a 20-year Hall voter, I dutifully dropped my 2017 ballot in the mail this week, thereby beating the mandate that it be postmarked by Dec. 31. When's the last time you actually mailed something that required it be postmarked by a certain date? For me, it was last year's Hall ballot!

Of course, by necessity, the process of Hall voting also embraces the past. We voters were tasked with analyzing the records of ballplayers who have been out of the game for at least five years. And in the case of the two biggest names on the ballot - Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens - they have been retired for a full decade.

This year, for the first time, the Roidz Boyz got my vote.

Like 99% of intelligent baseball observers, I have no doubt that Bonds and Clemens were big-time juicers. I also have no doubt they were Hall-caliber players. I fully understand and respect why some of (maybe even the majority of) my voting colleagues will continue to ignore the Roidz Boyz. But for me, it's time.

Two years ago in The Baldest Truth, I explained my then-new policy for Steroid Era candidates:

1. If a player is the subject of completely unsubstantiated rumors (think Frank Thomas, who some thought "must be on steroids because he's so big"), I will tune out the noise and consider him as early as his first year on the ballot.

2. If a player is the subject of steroid whispers that conceivably might have merit (think Mike Piazza), I will not consider him as a first-ballot candidate to see if any new information gets fleshed out. If, after a year of additional scrutiny no new information is presented, I will consider him beginning in his second year on the ballot.

3. If a player likely was a steroid cheat but all available evidence showed that he had a Hall-worthy body of work before the juicing began (think Bonds and Clemens), I will consider him but only beginning with his fifth year on the ballot. I want to allow plenty of time before checking that box.

4. If I am convinced that a player could not have compiled his seemingly Hall-worthy stats without him having been a rampant juicer (think Mark McGwire), I will not vote for him because his entire career is a sham.

Simply stated, Bonds and Clemens were two of the best players I saw during my long career as a baseball reporter and columnist. That was the case even before they reportedly started taking steroids. Furthermore, for what it's worth, both have been publicly exonerated - Bonds by the courts and Clemens by Congress.

I suppose I could invoke the "character" clause to keep them off of my ballot. And again, I don't blame others who do just that. But lots of racists and drunks and scoundrels and druggies and cheaters and criminals have been enshrined. Should Cooperstown kick out Ty Cobb? Babe Ruth? Gaylord Perry? The dozens upon dozens of players who practically lived on greenies?

While the Roidz Boyz finally get my votes, a few other tainted former stars do not. I firmly believe that neither Sammy Sosa nor Gary Sheffield would have had Hall-worthy numbers had they not used their tushies like pincushions. As a bonus, Sammy also got caught corking his bat. Cheater, cheater, Flintstones Vitamins eater!

As ballot newcomers, Manny Ramirez and Pudge Rodriguez fall under Rule 2 above. Pudge was the best catcher I've seen and I'll consider him more thoroughly next year. I'm less excited about Manny's candidacy.

Before I reveal all of my choices, let me explain the reasons I didn't check the boxes next to a few other Hall candidates ...

Trevor Hoffman, Lee Smith, Billy Wagner. Because the save is one of the most overrated statistics in the sport, it's not easy for a reliever to get my vote. He had to have been a transcendent figure (like Mariano Rivera), and/or had to have been a good starter at one point in his career (like John Smoltz), and/or had to have regularly recorded multiple-inning saves (like Rollie Fingers). None of the current candidates met any of those requirements. Hoffman has a decent shot at getting in this year, and I don't begrudge him the honor. This is Smith's last year on the ballot and he probably will fall well short. Wagner has only a slightly better chance at being a Hall of Famer than Joe Borowski does.

Jorge Posada. He was a leader and a winner for the Yankees, but he just doesn't have the stats. Other fine players who don't quite have HoF numbers include Jeff Kent, Derrek Lee, Magglio Ordonez and Larry Walker.

Edgar Martinez. Of those who didn't get my vote, he was the toughest omission because he was a heck of a hitter. However ...

His "similarity scores" on BaseballReference.com compare him to Will Clark, John Olerud, Moises Alou, Magglio Ordonez, Bob Johnson, Matt Holliday, Bernie Williams, Paul O'Neill, Lance Berkman and Ellis Burks. Those guys also were outstanding hitters, but there isn't a Hall of Famer in the bunch. I am willing to vote for a DH (as I showed with my first-ballot vote for Frank Thomas), but Thomas' numbers were considerably better than Martinez's. Edgar never won a pennant and only once did he finish in the top 5 in MVP voting. Mostly, his career stats just aren't strong enough for me; he doesn't rank in the top 120 in HR, RBI or WAR. 

So here are the 7 players who received my check marks on the 2017 Hall of Fame ballot:

Jeff Bagwell

Barry Bonds

Roger Clemens

Vladimir Guerrero

Mike Mussina

Tim Raines

Curt Schilling

I already have talked about Bonds and Clemens. Bagwell, Mussina, Raines and Schilling are repeat selections for me, and I discussed them in detail in my Dec. 24, 2013 post. (Read It.) This is Raines' final season on the ballot and he came pretty close last year, so I hope one of his generation's best table-setters gets in at the final buzzer.

Which brings me to Vlad the Impaler ...

After the ballot was released publicly, my son called to talk about a few of the new candidates. "How about Vlad Guerrero?" My knee-jerk reaction: "Maybe, but I kinda doubt it." That's usually my initial reaction unless a guy is an absolute lock, such as Ken Griffey Jr. last year. It's the classic, instant "does he feel like a Hall of Famer" feeling. After I look into the numbers more, though, a candidate's case sometimes becomes more compelling. Such was the case with Vlad.

For example, I always thought of him as a free swinger who struck out a lot. Well, he was a free swinger ... but he never struck out even 100 times in any season and he fanned significantly less often than all 10 of his BaseballReference.com "similars" - including Hall of Famers Willie Stargell, Jim Rice, Billy Williams and Duke Snider. Meanwhile, his on-base percentage was better than the first three and only .001 lower than Duke's. His .931 OPS ranks 34th all-time.

His 449 HR (38th most in history) are the exact same as Bagwell's total and more than the totals of Rice, Williams and Stargell. His 1,496 RBI put him ahead of Rice, Williams and Snider. Guerrero played 16 seasons - the same as Rice, fewer than his other comparables and one more than Bagwell.  - and he didn't go long past his prime. 

In 2010, his next-to-last season, the 35-year-old Guerrero batted .300 with 29 HR, 115 RBI and an .841 OPS to help the Texas Rangers reach the World Series for the first time in franchise history. He was 11th in MVP voting - the eighth time he finished at least that high. He won the award in 2004 with the Angels and had four other top-6 finishes (two with the Expos, two with the Angels).

Those who say that he was an error-prone (albeit strong-armed) right fielder and that his career batting stats make him a borderline Hall of Fame candidate ... I can't argue too strongly with them. 

It says here, however, that his statistics give him a solid HoF resume - and drop him on the right side of the border. 

Vlad Guerrero gets my check mark, and I will be very curious to see how my BBWAA peers treat him.
^

Today's High 5: Clemens "not guilty" ... but probably not Hall bound

^
5. OK, so Roger Clemens is officially "innocent." Can we please start spending tax dollars on something that actually matters to society?

Like, perhaps, appointing me Czar of Sports Hackery?

4. Yes, Jim Furyk imploded in a collapse that, while not quite Vandeveldeian or Normanian (or even Cubbian), certainly was impressive. And yes, some poser named Eldrick Woods fell apart on Saturday and Sunday, proving for the umpteenth time that he's nowhere near being Tiger again.

But give Webb Simpson credit. While others around him were fading away in the San Fran fog, he was shooting a 68-68 over the weekend on a course that seemed only slightly more fun than a Seamus Romney road trip.

Simpson not only outlasted everybody, he outplayed everybody. He made the most big shots on championship Sunday. And that, my friends, is how you win a U.S. Open.

3. I remember having a discussion at the end of the 2007 NFL season with another scribe during which we concluded that LaDainian Tomlinson was one of the top five running backs we had seen, right up there with Walter Payton, Emmitt Smith, O.J. Simpson and Barry Sanders. (We both are too young to remember Jim Brown.)

After that discussion, L.T. had an injury-plagued 1,100-yard season, followed by two sub-par (for him) years, followed by last season's slog as a specialty back for the mediocre Jets.

And now he has retired at the ripe old age of 32.

Life as an NFL runner is glamorous for a short spell but certainly isn't easy.

2. Finally, LeBron James is looking and acting and sounding and, most importantly, playing like a guy who cares more about winning than anything else.

He's only two wins away from proving he belongs to be mentioned in the same breath as the Michaels, Kobes and Magics.

Of course, he's also only three losses away from having more scorn rained down upon him than any Twitter-era athlete ever has experienced.

Kind of makes you root for him a little, no?

No? OK.

1. So now that Clemens has been found not guilty of perjury and all other charges against him in a trial that cost taxpayers a mere 3 million bucks, what are his chances of getting into the Baseball Hall of Fame?

Answer: not too good.

Based on how voting has gone down the last few years, if a guy even is suspected slightly of having used steroids, he gets the short shrift from the Baseball Writers Association of America. And despite Monday's verdict, more than a little suspicion remains about Roger. He will be shunned big-time.

I am leaning toward voting for him because I believe he had a Hall of Fame record of accomplishment before his juicing reportedly began.

Having said that, I probably won't vote for him this December, when he appears on the ballot for the first time.

I've never been a voter who has differentiated between "regular" Hall of Famers and first-ballot Hall of Famers. It never bothered me that some of my peers reserved first-ballot status only for the best of the best, but I always felt that if a guy deserved a Hall vote, he deserved it ... period.

I think I'll change things up for the few Roid Boyz that I deem Hall worthy. If they're going to get my vote at all, they're going to have to wait for it.

Why? Because I have the power to make them wait, that's why.
^

Hall call was worth the wait for Blyleven, Alomar

^
As a Baseball Hall of Fame voter, I'm often asked how it's possible that a BBWAA member fails to vote for a guy one year but then changes his/her mind 12 months later. After all, the perfectly sane argument goes, the player's stats didn't change during those 52 weeks.

The newest enshrinees announced Wednesday, Bert Blyleven and Robbie Alomar, exemplify why it happens ... and demonstrate that it even makes some sense.

This was Blyleven's 14th year on the ballot, meaning he'd have had only one more try after this one. I didn't vote for him his first 10 years but became a convert four years ago. For the longest time, I had trouble reconciling the fact that if the likes of Jim Kaat and Tommy John weren't in, why should Blyleven? The three had similar stats and similar impact on teams.

Over time, however, several fellow voters made reasonable cases for Blyleven, and I finally saw their points. They emphasized his strikeouts, complete games and two World Series rings, as well as the relative weakness of many of the teams on which he played. And they correctly said that just because Kaat and John didn't get the votes, that was no reason to take it out on Blyleven.

I am not the least bit ashamed that it took me 10 years to come around. Justice was served in the end. (And not David Justice ... he ain't getting in!)

Alomar was the best second baseman I ever saw and, for more than a decade, one of the great offensive catalysts in the game. I enthusiastically voted for him last year, his first on the ballot.

Several of my BBWAA colleagues who shunned him last year checked the box next to his name this time - and I have absolutely no problem with that. Keeping Alomar from being a first-ballot Hall of Famer was perfectly fitting punishment for a jerk who spat on an umpire.

As for other Hall tidbits ...

++ The only other player to earn my check mark this year, Jack Morris, got 53.5 percent of the vote - far short of the 75 percent every Hall of Famer needs. I fully respect the fact that Morris is a borderline case, a big-game pitcher with an excellent winning percentage who excelled for a decade but lacked an eye-popping win total and ERA.

++ The only other guys I seriously considered this time were Barry Larkin and Tim Raines. Maybe I'll change my mind about one or the other someday. Or maybe not.

++ Mercy! Harold Baines finally fell 2 votes shy of remaining on the ballot for future years. He simply isn't a Hall of Famer, despite the arguments on his behalf by my SouthtownStar buddy Phil Arvia.

++ Jeff Bagwell, Alan Trammell, Larry Walker, Dave Parker, Don Mattingly and Dale Murphy were all very good players for a very long time but it's unlikely that any will make the Hall. That shows how difficult it is to get in - which, of course, it should be.

++ Mark McLiar actually lost support from last year to this. Good. He did one thing well ... and did that well only because he made a pin cushion out of his buttocks for years and years. One-dimensional idiots do not belong in the Hall of Fame.

++ I can understand why some of my peers voted for Rafael Palmeiro, who had very good stats over the years (but was a juicer who rarely helped his teams succeed). That 30 of them voted for Juan Gonzalez, a steroid-swilling clown whose numbers relative to his era were unimpressive, is more of a head-scratcher.

++ Two voters checked the box next to B.J. Surhoff's name, one gave Bret Boone a vote and another chose Benito Santiago. Something there helps explain why both Dubya and Blago each got elected to major executive offices ... twice!
^

Rose isn't Selig's bud

^

The Bald Truth

Despite reports to the contrary, don't bet on Bud Selig ever reinstating Pete Rose. 

Selig would rather make do with 98 percent of his $18 million salary (so MLB.com could pay its interns) than lift the ban on Gamblin' Pete.

Rose has cheated and lied and broken sacred rules and acted the fool, and he's done much of it on Selig's watch. Bud isn't about to reward Pete by letting him have a shot at the Hall of Fame.

Still, I say they are separate issues. 

Gamblin' Pete shouldn't be allowed anywhere near baseball now. Not as a manager, not as a GM, not as a coach, not as an ambassador.

But Charlie Hustle should be in the Hall for his accomplishments as a player. There has been no proof that Rose ever gambled on baseball during his playing days, and he certainly was an all-time great.

At the same time, I have little sympathy for Pete Rose. He made his bed ... and he called his bookie from it.

The Balder Truth

Apparently, $136 Million Cubbie Alfonso Soriano isn't allergic to the No. 6 spot after all.

Everybody has known forever that the man isn't a leadoff hitter. And now he's killing the ball from the 6-hole - including Monday's game-winning grand slam against the 'Stros.

Looking back on it now, you wonder what Lou Piniella was so afraid of for 2 1/2 years.

THE BALDEST TRUTH

I set up my Facebook account Monday afternoon and I'm still trying to decide if I like it or hate it. 

Sure, it feels good to be at least up to 2007 levels of technology. But who needs that many so-called friends? I haven't been this popular since I coated myself with kibble and went to the dog pound.

So please don't take it personally if I don't accept you as a friend. I mean, I don't take it personally that my kids have rejected my i-friendship.

"Facebook," Ben informed me, "isn't for old dudes like you."

Ouch.

Ryno slams El Roido

^
The Bald Truth

I've not yet decided how I'll vote when Sammy Sosa's name appears on the Hall of Fame ballot in five years. Ryne Sandberg, who hopes to be the Cubs' manager by then, is giving me the punt sign.

That's right: Ryno is saying no-go to El Roido (a.k.a. El Corko).

"Part of being in the Hall of Fame, they use the word integrity in describing a Hall of Famer ... and I think there are gonna be quite a few players that are not gonna get in," Sandberg told a Chicago radio station Tuesday.

Yes, there is an integrity clause ... but it's tricky. Should spitballer Gaylord Perry have gotten in? What about selfish Reggie Jackson? Racist jerk Ty Cobb? Should I vote for Robbie Alomar, who spat in an umpire's face?

Ryno unquestionably is right about the last thing he said, though. No matter how I vote, I doubt the likes of Sosa, Mark McGwire, Gary Sheffield, Manny Ramirez and Rafael Palmeiro will get in.

There simply is too much sentiment against the cheaters. McGwire, the first of the eligible juicers, has gotten less love from BBWAA voters than Jon has lately from Kate (and vice versa).

Even Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds are in doubt.

And I really don't like the Hall chances of Alex Sanchez and Felix Heredia, who must not have followed directions on their 'roid labels very well.

The Quote

"People love me everywhere I go." - Manny Ramirez

Especially people who sell syringes.

The Balder Truth

While talking to reporters before Tuesday's game, White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen saw that the Dodgers' Juan Pierre was listening in.

Ozzie: "We're gonna play 10 guys in the infield. You're not bunting! I tell you, we're gonna have everybody in the middle."

Juan: "When I get a bunt base-hit, I'm gonna look right at you!"

Ozzie: "Two million dollars if you get a bunt base-hit on me!"

Thanks to a diving catch at third base by Gordon Beckham - robbing Pierre of a bunt hit in the eighth - Ozzie gets to keep his millions.

It was the only good news on this night for Guillen, whose impotent losers fizzled again at home.

A Hall of a Voter

Longtime loyal reader Doug Nicodemus asked why I have a Hall vote. Here's the deal:

Every 10-plus-year member of the Baseball Writers Association of America in good standing gets a ballot. Because I was in the BBWAA for 25 years before my newspaper company so generously set me free, I received lifetime membership - and lifetime Hall voting rights.

So I'm kind of like a Supreme Court justice, only more objective - and not quite as bald as Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

THE BALDEST TRUTH

It is absurd that MLB is letting Manny be Manny for a bunch of minor-league "rehab" games before his drug suspension ends.

Maybe they were just worried he wouldn't be able to make ends meet without that Triple-A meal money: 20 bucks a day.

No cork-popping for Sammy

^

The List

Sammy and his handlers aren't talking publicly yet, but they already are getting their excuses lined up in a row:

5. It was a mistake. I just picked the wrong drugs, the ones I use for batting practice - just to put on a show for the fans. I like to make people happy.

4. I accidentally took the spiked supplements that Miguel Tejada gave Rafael Palmeiro.

3. No comprende, senor.

2. Have you ever tried to pick up the key to New York City? It's heavy, buddy! I had to do something to get a little stronger.

1. It was A-Rod's cousin's fault!

The Bald Truth

But seriously, folks ... I don't know about you, but I am shocked.

Shocked, I tell you!

I mean, who would have looked at Sammy Sosa back in his 60-plus-homer heyday and thought, "Hey, this guy just might be ingesting more than Flintstones vitamins, his claimed performance-enhancers"?

Sammy was so svelte back then. Not at all Michelin Mannish. His head wasn't the size of a musk melon, only a cantaloupe.

And he was so even-keeled. No 'roid rage with Sammy. No paranoia. No moodiness. He was always about the team. Never about the stats. Never about the money. 

He certainly wasn't the kind of guy who'd panic and react to a slump by corking a bat or anything.

Hey, just because the New York Times says Sammy's name was on the list of 104 juicers - right up the alphabet from A-Roid Rodriguez - in what was supposed to be an anonymous testing back in 2003, does that make it true?

Next thing you know, all these negative nabobs will be saying that Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds were taking steroids, too!

The Question

While giving journalistic props to the Times and to Sports Illustrated (which broke the A-Roid story earlier this year), doesn't it make you squirm just a little knowing that something supposedly done in strict confidence is being leaked to the media drip by drip?

THE BALDEST TRUTH

They are all guilty, every last one. 

From the juicers themselves to the skinniest dude in cleats who never even took aspirin to the managers to the GMs to the union honchos to The Commish.

They all knew it was going on and they all looked the other way.

Nobody's clean. Nobody.

So when the time comes, do those of us with Hall of Fame votes check the box next to Sosa, Bonds, Roger Clemens and their ilk ... or do we refuse to vote for anybody who played between 1983 and 2004, even if it means we have to turn in blank ballots?

From Cra-Z to delusional Sammy

^
The Bald Truth

Word is, Cra-Z Zambrano missed the Cubs' flight to Atlanta because he couldn't afford the CTA fare to O'Hare.

Hey, it went up by a whole quarter not too long ago!

The Balder Truth

Nice job by the White Sox bringing up ballyhooed infield prospect Gordon Beckham.

It was time to dump Wilson Betemit (The Impediment) and to dial back the playing time of Whiffmeister Josh Fields.

The Sox could have gotten away with saying that their 2008 No. 1 draft pick needed "more seasoning" in the minors - which would have been a good way to delay his eventual big-bucks earning potential.

But they are trying to win now ... and really, is there any way Beckham can do any worse than Fields and Betemit?

Not as long as he doesn't wear a blindfold to the batter's box and oven mitts when taking the field.

THE BALDEST TRUTH

Gotta love this nugget from ESPNdeportes.com: Sammy Sosa says he soon will announce his retirement. He also told the Web site he won't allow his legacy to be tainted by all those who say he used steroids.

"Everything I achieved, I did it thanks to my perseverance, which is why I never had any long, difficult moments. I will calmly wait for my induction to the Baseball Hall of Fame. Don't I have the numbers to be inducted?"

So many reactions, so little time ...

1. Sammy isn't already retired?

2. If Sammy actually used "perseverance" correctly in a sentence - be it a Spanish sentence, an English sentence or a Hebrew sentence - I'll pay Cra-Z's next "el" fare.

3. Sure ... no long, difficult moments at all for Sammy. Unless one counts a week-long suspension for using a corked bat, a trip to the DL after a sneeze-enduced back ailment, permanent banishment from Cubbieland - and corresponding boom-box destruction - after his premature departure from Wrigley Field during the 2004 season finale, numerous strikeout-filled batting slumps, etc., etc., etc.

4. Yes, Sammy certainly has Hall-worthy numbers. And he might want to call his "buddy," Mark McGwire, to chat about exactly what those numbers are worth to cynical, juicer-denying Hall voters.

5. Here's hoping Sammy enjoys his calm wait. His long, calm wait. His 20-year long and ultimately unfulfilling, calm wait. He just might want to accept his invitation into the Corking Hall of Fame, because that's about the only one that figures to come a-callin'.

Cubs No. 31: Right Number, Wrong Call

^

Here are Pitcher X's numbers:

++10 seasons.

++Average of 13 victories per year with .543 winning percentage.

++3.61 ERA.

++One Cy Young Award, 2 All-Star Game appearances.

++One 20-win season.

++Zero seasons of 200 or more strikeouts.

++Zero seasons of 270 of more innings pitched.

++One postseason appearance, going 0-1 with a 13.50 ERA in two starts as his team lost series.

If one is in a generous mood, one would call those results "good." Nothing more, possibly less.

And certainly not worthy of having one's number retired!

Well, congratulations to Pitcher X, a.k.a. Greg Maddux. 

He is going to be celebrated Sunday at Wrigley Field because ... um ... why?

Because the only categories in which he ranked in the Cubs' top 10 all-time were losses, home runs allowed, games started and strikeouts?

No, because he happened to have worn No. 31, that's why.

It's the same No. 31 that was worn by Fergie Jenkins, a true Cubs great whose number should have been retired before Maddux ever threw his first big-league pitch.

What Jenkins did in a Chicago uniform was so superior, Maddux almost should be embarrassed to share the spotlight Sunday. (But really, he has nothing to be embarrassed about because this was the Cubs' call and not his.)

Here are Fergie's facts and figures:

++10 seasons.

++Average of 17 victories per year with .559 winning percentage.

++3.20 ERA.

++One Cy Young Award (and 3 other top-three finishes), 3 All-Star Game appearances.

++Six straight 20-win seasons.

++Four straight seasons of 260 or more strikeouts.

++Seven straight seasons of 271 or more innings pitched, including four straight of 308 or more.

Wow!

And don't forget that while Jenkins was sent packing by the Cubs in 1974, Maddux left on his own accord after the 1992 season. Yes, the Cubs were cheap and stupid. No, I don't blame Maddux for bolting. But it was his decision to go to Atlanta and become an ex-Cub.

Then, when Maddux returned to the North Side in 2004 to join The Greatest Rotation Ever Assembled By Man Or Beast, he proceeded to go 38-37 over the next three seasons with a 4.26 ERA while never helping the Cubs reach the postseason.

Please, the point here isn't to denigrate Maddux. It's to wonder why the Cubs feel the need to include him in the long-overdue ceremony to retire Jenkins' number.

A cynic might suggest that there are racial overtones to the whole thing, given that Maddux is a popular white guy and Jenkins is a black man who was busted for cocaine possession in 1980.

Sorry, but even I'm not that cynical. I choose to give the Cubs the benefit of the doubt and say race wasn't part of the equation. I simply am convinced that the Cubs want to please as many people as possible. I also believe the Cubs still feel guilty about letting Maddux get away to spend the best part of his career in Atlanta.

There's nothing wrong with those reasons from a marketing standpoint, I suppose, but they're hardly reasons to honor a pitcher who ranks 13th on the team's all-time wins list. In their long, inglorious history, the Cubs have honored only four players by retiring their numbers, and now they're going to do so for a pitcher who ranks 30th on their all-time ERA list?

On his Hall of Fame bust, Jenkins' Cubs hat is proudly displayed. Maddux? His Cooperstown bust will be topped by Atlanta's "A." Let the Braves retire No. 31. (In fact, they will in July.)

Yes, a lot of Cubbie fans think Maddux is "classy." OK, so should the team retire the number of every good guy who also was a good ballplayer? Come on down, Shawon Dunston!

Yes, a lot of Cubbie fans from the Harry Caray Era - when the team became a phenomenon and when going to Wrigley became an event - adored Maddux. OK, so should the team retire the number of every fan favorite? Hello, Mickey Morandini!

Frankly, there are a few players not named Maddux that the Cubs could honor with number-retirement ceremonies. 

One could make a darned good argument for Mark Grace, who ranks in the team's all-time top 10 in games, at-bats, runs, hits, total bases, doubles, extra-base hits, RBIs and walks. He also was very popular with fans for more than a decade. It's borderline criminal that the list of those who have gone on to wear Grace's No. 17 includes Bobby Hill, Calvin Murray, Adam Greenberg, John Mabry and Felix Pie. I mean, compared to those nobodies, the latest No. 17, Mike Fontenot, is Hall of Fame material.

(Hey, maybe the Cubs are waiting to retire No. 17 until they can honor both Grace and Fontenot!)

Based on statistics and impact alone, Sammy Sosa is a no-brainer. The stains of steroids, bat-corking, selfishness and petulance make retiring his number tough to justify. Somehow, he deserves having No. 21 worn by wacky Milton Bradley.

How about Kerry Wood? Classy. Charitable. A leader. Loyal. One of the most exciting pitchers of his time. A guy who repeatedly overcame adversity and almost singlehandedly carried the team to its only postseason-series victory of the last century. His proponents could point to his strikeouts and his successful shift to closer - not to mention his four postseason appearances, a figure unheard of in modern-day Cubbieland.

Still, given his history of injuries and his unimpressive victory total, retiring Wood's No. 34 would be a stretch, right?

Well, sure. But he still is every bit as deserving as Greg Maddux.

Northwestern? Never!

^
The Bald Truth

Now that Northwestern has blown a 50-point lead in the last 2 minutes (or something like that) against Illinois, can the inexplicably hopeful Chicago media corps please stop suggesting that this might be the year the Mildcats finally make the NCAAs?

The List

Five things that will happen before Northwestern makes its NCAA hoops tourney debut:

1. America will elect another black president. And a female president. And a Jewish president. And an Albino president. And Blago president. And ... well, you get the idea.

2. The Cubs will celebrate their sixth straight World Series championship, breaking the record of the 1949-53 Yankees.

3. Phil Mickelson will beat Tiger Woods on the first playoff hole at Augusta.

4. Saying "Why bother fighting it any more?" Bud Selig will announce new rules requiring every ballplayer to take steroids, HGH, greenies and Flintstones Vitamins.

5. Everything and anything. Because Northwestern will never make the NCAAs. Never, ever, ever. OK, I'll stop trying to sugarcoat this: NEVER!

The Letter

From Wally Boller of Galesburg, Ill.: "I would like to go on the record with this prediction: Thirty minutes before the New York Jets' first game next fall, Brett Favre will drive up in a taxi, in full uniform, run out on the field and announce that he has decided not to retire after all."

And 30 minutes after that, ESPN will report that he might or might not retire after the season.

THE BALDEST TRUTH

Forget all the A-Roid stuff. In what had to be the wildest baseball story of the offseason, an ex-girlfriend of Robbie Alomar filed a $15 million civil suit alleging that the likely Hall of Fame second baseman demanded unprotected sex with her for four years despite showing obvious signs that he had AIDS. Alomar has called her a liar.

I won't question the woman's sincerity because I don't know her or the circumstances, but I do wonder why she stuck around for four years.

I mean, it took abused ump John Hirschbeck only about four seconds to realize he never wanted to see Alomar again.

By the way, if my fellow BBWAA Hall of Fame voters are going to use the integrity, character and sportsmanship clauses to dismiss A-Roid and other juicers, shouldn't they give a big thumbs-down to Alomar when he becomes eligible for the next election class?

Or is inserting a syringe in one's own posterior less sportsmanlike than spitting in an umpire's face?

Juicers Hall of Fame

^
Got a call the other day from USA Today, which was polling BBWAA Hall of Fame voters about A-Roid Rodriguez. The question:

Will I or won't I vote for him when he becomes eligible five years after he retires?

My answer was a reluctant yes.

And not only for A-Roid but for Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and, starting next year, Mark McGwire, for whom I hadn't voted his first three years on the ballot. (Sammy Sosa is a tougher sell, because he was caught corking his bat, too.)

What's starting to sink in for me is that the use of performance-enhancing drugs was so widespread from 1985 (and maybe earlier) through 2005 (and maybe later) that I probably either have to vote for every deserving ballplayer or no ballplayer at all, regardless of his stats.

It's obvious that we can't trust any of them. For example, Frank Thomas has denied ever taking steroids and was among the first players to welcome random testing. Then again, he was huge, he was muscular, he was moody and his body broke down, all tell-tale signs of juicing. Now please, I'm not saying The Big Hurt was The Big Syringe. All I'm saying is that we can't be sure.

So do we exclude only the guys named in the Mitchell Report? (Don't forget: McGwire and Sosa were barely mentioned.)

Do we exclude only the Mitchell guys and those whose names are about to be made public from the 2003 testing procedure? (That's what sunk A-Roid, thanks to great reporting by Sports Illustrated's Selena Roberts.)

Do we exclude only the Mitchell guys, the 2003 guys and those we're pretty darned sure took steroids?

Do we exclude only the Mitchell guys, the 2003 guys, the pretty-darned-sure guys and the guys we now suspect are taking HGH and other hard-to-detect enhancers?

Do guys who admit and apologize - even if their admissions and/or apologies are as unsatisfying as A-Roid's was - get dibs over guys who deny? What if the deniers are telling the truth?

Do we throw out two decades of candidates - every darned one of them, from frauds like A-Roid to choir boys like Jim Thome - because even if they weren't users they surely knew juicing was going on in their clubhouses and they chose to ignore it?

Or do we say this:

"Hey, there was the Dead Ball Era, the Live Ball Era, the greenies era, the nearly century-long era that didn't let black men play big-league ball and, from 1985-on, the Steroid Era. The Hall of Fame always has been about how players stacked up against their peers ... and McGwire had to bat against Clemens, Andy Pettitte had to pitch to A-Roid and so on."

The latter is where I'm leaning.

Now excuse me while I go take a long, hot, cleansing shower.

Cubs sold; McGwire sold out

^
The Bald Truth

Word is, the super-duper-rich Ricketts family is set to buy the Cubs for $900 million.

And for only $900 million more, they could buy another 818 pitchers every bit as good as Michael Wuertz!

(See, Wuertz just signed for $1.1 million, so you have to do the math and ... OK, they can't all be worthy of Comedy Central.)

The Balder Truth

I thought frequent TBT commenter Doug Nicodemus had a valid point when he said I should have included Rod Carew as one of the five best second basemen of my lifetime in yesterday's blog.

Then I looked it up: Carew actually spent more time playing first base than second.

So let's compromise and say he's in the top 5 1/2.

See how calm and rational life is under a new president?

THE BALDEST TRUTH

First, it was Jose Canseco saying he used to inject former "Bash Brother" Mark McGwire in the keister with steroids.

Now, it's Jay McGwire saying in what he hopes will be a tell-all book that he used to inject big bro Mark in the keister with steroids.

There's nothing quite like brotherly love, huh?

Hey, even if BBWAA voters never send Big Mac to Cooperstown, he's got to be a lock for the Pincushion Hall of Fame.